The EU Rapid Deployment Force is on schedule to become fully operational next year. It’s only 5,000 troops, but there are calls to increase it to 20,000 to be able to better fulfill the aims set out in the first Strategic Compass.
We can’t have a joint military if we don’t have a joint foreign policy. And we can’t have that if every decision has to wait for the unanimity of 27 members. We need decisiveness and currently we very much don’t.
Not mentioning all the legal framework that comes with having a military, the need for intelligence agencies (for military, foreign and internal affairs), etc.
If we combined all EU armies, would it be bigger than the US army?
Sometimes I wonder if posts like this are designed to create anti EU sentiment among member states.
No thanks. Please don’t move the power even further away from the people by centralizing the government even more.
Roman empire 2.0
For common DEFENCE I’m in for it
I don’t like the idea with this kind of EU. I don’t want to serve a puppet union of countries.
No thanks, sweden has conscription and conscription is exclusively for defence of home territory. Imagine not having a say in joining a military operation that’s not defence of your home country **when you didn’t choose to be part of the military**.
Who would fund this army?
Who would lead this army?
Nah. Denmark in the last 20 years have always said yes to participate in every war, but if our forces are held up in EU we can no longer use then, since they have to stay ready in EU. This is only good for freerider peeps like Ireland, Switzerland, Austria or frontline nations like balticum and Poland, I suppose. Denmark will support frontline nations with all we got, but we also will fight russia else where than standing ready in EU
Don’t give people like von der Leyen an army!
I don’t see the point.
Instead of more complicated bureaucratic nonsense, how about the pathetic excuses for militaries in the West go arm up?
I’ve been reading about the united army of Europe for 15 years.
If it is a military contingent that consists of various military personnel from individual EU countries, then nothing good will happen: political preferences in countries are changing, and military personnel serve the country, not the EU.
I am surprised that no one has proposed to create a military company, let’s call it the European legion, which every EU citizen can join, which is funded from the EU budget and subordinated to the EU structure.
This way, many issues can be resolved, ranging from issues of oath and loyalty to individual countries, to the political will of the EU, which does not depend on the whim of individual countries. I don’t think I was the first to suggest this, but apparently the European army, separate from the national ones, scares the leaders of the countries a lot.
Comment section will be gold. My 2 cents are that is extremely bad idea to push controversial policies while you need unity which is in all time low. Also NATO already takes care of defense with additional proven allies. True joint procurement programs would be nice though.
It may not. And there are so many reasons why not.
There is still one conceptual problem with any attempt to create a joint military: what resources?
If the current militaries are merged together, then countries will lose control over their militaries which is of course a huge problem in peripheral countries, especially those bordering Russia.
If it’s done additionally to the current militaries, then first, it would require increasing defense spending and second, it would still reduce the pool of men for the national militaries.
I guess some kind of joint capabilities could be beneficial for all, but definitely not for regular infantry etc.
No thanks, joint military means joint command. NATO for good and bad, already has us covered.
Besides only the UK and US would help us ( you can look up the pew research yourselves ) in case you know who decided to come and visit. As Trump would say: what’s in it for us?
Any kind of army without a political union it’s just a waste of taxpayer money.
No thnx, I don’t want to pay for french wars in africa.
how about no , the EU isnt a military force , if you want to play army use NATO
The closest the EU army will ever come to warfare is donating their old military equipment to Ukraine 20 years from now, when they will still be fighting Russia by themselves.
A vision from the future
Now it’s not the time, nor it will be in the foreseeable future.
People keep suggesting this, yet none of those people actually have a good plan on how the army would work. How is it funded and how do you get all those countries to agree to pay billions for an army they have no or limited control over? Where would they be stationed, and what if a country hosting troops, weaponry or ammunition withdraws their approval for it? How do you agree when to deploy it. Simple majority vote? 2/3 majority? If it’s a vote, does every country’s vote weigh the same or do they have a different weight on some metric like financial contributions to the army, population or GDP? What if a war breaks out, and a country X backs out because they want to avoid involvement? Do we now have a funding problem because country X pulls funding? What happens with soldiers from their country, do we instantly lose thousands of soldiers? What about any EU Army weaponry stored there?
Maybe not completely at an EU-level, but me as a spaniard would be happy to do something like this with Portugal, for example.
It would be so useful for both Spain and Portugal to unify some services in a way that could make them more effective and at the same time reduce costs and get better coordination. No redundant expenses in military, energy network, transport, fire control, healthcare, etc.
Pipe dream
Will never happen cause no country would accept this
How about EU just helps funding the militaries in the countries that share a border with the enemy, also known as Russia.
27 comments
The EU Rapid Deployment Force is on schedule to become fully operational next year. It’s only 5,000 troops, but there are calls to increase it to 20,000 to be able to better fulfill the aims set out in the first Strategic Compass.
We can’t have a joint military if we don’t have a joint foreign policy. And we can’t have that if every decision has to wait for the unanimity of 27 members. We need decisiveness and currently we very much don’t.
Not mentioning all the legal framework that comes with having a military, the need for intelligence agencies (for military, foreign and internal affairs), etc.
If we combined all EU armies, would it be bigger than the US army?
Sometimes I wonder if posts like this are designed to create anti EU sentiment among member states.
No thanks. Please don’t move the power even further away from the people by centralizing the government even more.
Roman empire 2.0
For common DEFENCE I’m in for it
I don’t like the idea with this kind of EU. I don’t want to serve a puppet union of countries.
No thanks, sweden has conscription and conscription is exclusively for defence of home territory. Imagine not having a say in joining a military operation that’s not defence of your home country **when you didn’t choose to be part of the military**.
Who would fund this army?
Who would lead this army?
Nah. Denmark in the last 20 years have always said yes to participate in every war, but if our forces are held up in EU we can no longer use then, since they have to stay ready in EU. This is only good for freerider peeps like Ireland, Switzerland, Austria or frontline nations like balticum and Poland, I suppose. Denmark will support frontline nations with all we got, but we also will fight russia else where than standing ready in EU
Don’t give people like von der Leyen an army!
I don’t see the point.
Instead of more complicated bureaucratic nonsense, how about the pathetic excuses for militaries in the West go arm up?
I’ve been reading about the united army of Europe for 15 years.
If it is a military contingent that consists of various military personnel from individual EU countries, then nothing good will happen: political preferences in countries are changing, and military personnel serve the country, not the EU.
I am surprised that no one has proposed to create a military company, let’s call it the European legion, which every EU citizen can join, which is funded from the EU budget and subordinated to the EU structure.
This way, many issues can be resolved, ranging from issues of oath and loyalty to individual countries, to the political will of the EU, which does not depend on the whim of individual countries. I don’t think I was the first to suggest this, but apparently the European army, separate from the national ones, scares the leaders of the countries a lot.
Comment section will be gold. My 2 cents are that is extremely bad idea to push controversial policies while you need unity which is in all time low. Also NATO already takes care of defense with additional proven allies. True joint procurement programs would be nice though.
It may not. And there are so many reasons why not.
There is still one conceptual problem with any attempt to create a joint military: what resources?
If the current militaries are merged together, then countries will lose control over their militaries which is of course a huge problem in peripheral countries, especially those bordering Russia.
If it’s done additionally to the current militaries, then first, it would require increasing defense spending and second, it would still reduce the pool of men for the national militaries.
I guess some kind of joint capabilities could be beneficial for all, but definitely not for regular infantry etc.
No thanks, joint military means joint command. NATO for good and bad, already has us covered.
Besides only the UK and US would help us ( you can look up the pew research yourselves ) in case you know who decided to come and visit. As Trump would say: what’s in it for us?
Any kind of army without a political union it’s just a waste of taxpayer money.
No thnx, I don’t want to pay for french wars in africa.
how about no , the EU isnt a military force , if you want to play army use NATO
The closest the EU army will ever come to warfare is donating their old military equipment to Ukraine 20 years from now, when they will still be fighting Russia by themselves.
A vision from the future
Now it’s not the time, nor it will be in the foreseeable future.
People keep suggesting this, yet none of those people actually have a good plan on how the army would work. How is it funded and how do you get all those countries to agree to pay billions for an army they have no or limited control over? Where would they be stationed, and what if a country hosting troops, weaponry or ammunition withdraws their approval for it? How do you agree when to deploy it. Simple majority vote? 2/3 majority? If it’s a vote, does every country’s vote weigh the same or do they have a different weight on some metric like financial contributions to the army, population or GDP? What if a war breaks out, and a country X backs out because they want to avoid involvement? Do we now have a funding problem because country X pulls funding? What happens with soldiers from their country, do we instantly lose thousands of soldiers? What about any EU Army weaponry stored there?
Maybe not completely at an EU-level, but me as a spaniard would be happy to do something like this with Portugal, for example.
It would be so useful for both Spain and Portugal to unify some services in a way that could make them more effective and at the same time reduce costs and get better coordination. No redundant expenses in military, energy network, transport, fire control, healthcare, etc.
Pipe dream
Will never happen cause no country would accept this
How about EU just helps funding the militaries in the countries that share a border with the enemy, also known as Russia.